[ineedaj0b]

rationally, budgets are constrained. any process that increases the number of potential tax payers is good. reassignment surgeries are elective, those receiving them do not pay more taxes, so priority should be given to fertility treatments.

[t-writescode]

Gender affirming care, including surgeries, increases the quality of life of transgender individuals, which can help make them more productive and even patriotic members of society and which can encourage other transgender individuals and those that believe in transgender rights into the country, potentially overall improving overall throughput and profit and taxes to pay for it all.

[simlitin]

That is certainly the rherotic that proponents of these interventions would like others to believe, but reality differs.

See for example:

- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/belgian-man-...

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk7NX7iPr9k

- https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5079802/chloe-cole-opening-st...

[throwaway1115]

In the ideal world there would be resources enough for everything.

But that's never gonna happen. Funding for Healthcare is limited. There can't be a truly universal healthcare.

Now on one hand you have infertility, leading to more than 10% of families struggling. This makes two members of a family struggle mentally. Also the lack of child will have societal impact (economical cultural etc).

On the other hand you have elective gender reassignment. It certainly impacts the quality of life of the person receiving it, but that's it.

Note that we are not talking about a homosexual couple trying to have a child. No. Right now the ocncern is gender reassignment for under aged children! Whether school should inform parents or not! In what universe this can have higher priority?